These comments are responses
to the questions listed below,
which were generated in regard to the David Clinefelter
Interview of 11-09-2012.

OVERVIEW

Online courses,
whether Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) or classes at colleges and
universities taught at least partly online, are poised to change the
face of higher education, according to David Clinefelter. A number of
colleges are offering free, non-credit online courses to anyone around
the world (MOOCs), expanding the scope of learning offered by some of
their best professors. It's a growing trend, even though it's not
always clear how the colleges are benefitting by offering the MOOCs.
Some colleges partner with private nonprofit and for-profit companies
to offer the courses. In addition, Clinefelter believes colleges and
large university systems could improve the content and quality of
certain standard courses and get more productivity from faculty by
offering those courses at least partly online. Faculty pay could be
differentiated between those who design courses and materials and
offer online lectures and those who supplement the online material by
working directly with students.

Response Summary:
Readers have been asked to rate, on a scale of (0) most disagreement,
to (5) neutral, to (10) most agreement, the following points discussed
by
Clinefelter. Average response ratings shown below are simply the mean
of all readers’ zero-to-ten responses to the ideas proposed and should
not be considered an accurate reflection of a scientifically
structured poll.

1. MOOCs are a
major innovation. (8.0
average response) Online courses
offered free of charge by prestigious universities and now enrolling
many thousands of students are a major innovation in postsecondary
education.

2. Opening access
is significant. (8.2average response) Despite questions
about competencies, credits, credentialing and other details, there is
great educational significance in giving millions of individuals
access to the best teaching minds available.

4.
Standardization offers advantages. (7.1average response) The online
movement offers advantages in cost, quality and productivity because
design of certain courses can be standardized across many
postsecondary institutions.

5. MOOCs allow
professors to excel. (7.2
average response) The movement
helps educators devote their time to what they do most effectively,
whether designing courses, lecturing, or assisting students.

6. MOOCs lower
costs, easing budgets. (6.6
average response) The movement will
help students obtain their education with more affordable tuition and
help elected officials allocate limited tax dollars.

1. MOOCs are a
major innovation.
This is Disruptive Technology in action-- realizing a need and an
opportunity, matched to technology change, occurred and [the
innovation] will grow as understanding is communicated.

2. Opening access
is significant.
There is direct educational benefit and complementary benefits of
networking, social skills interaction, and sharing of both the
educational and interpersonal and international links.

3. Colleges must
hasten to participate.
Traditional postsecondary institutions must move but the question is
will they? The static approach to understanding this type of change
will likely override the benefits in many institutions as they resist
the change to their so-called image and type of education. This will
lead to a crisis in many schools to the point that some will face
major changes in scope and size and some will go away.

4.
Standardization offers advantages.
I strongly agree with the core of the statement; however the use of
the word “standardize” is very disturbing. As we talk one day about
small size and tailoring to the student the next topic is standardize
the system, which destroys the size benefits. We need to do this
change while allowing and including flexibility in some way. This to
me is a key challenge.

5. MOOCs allow
professors to excel. Agree but the
list of what they do best must include the complex word—research.
There must be a process in this type of on-line education for
educators to regularly connect with students directly or indirectly.

6. MOOCs lower
costs, easing budgets. This should be
the result and will be realized to some degree. Just how and how much
[can] be another opportunity for disruptive technology to play into
the game. If there is not a push for resulting lower cost, the funds
will simply go elsewhere in the institution budget. Need to start by
determining what is saved by online—and is it real saving or virtual
funds?

7. MOOCs preclude
personal contact. This is a
frequent criticism and perhaps partially correct. It is up to the
designers of the individual class and subject to tailor the class
online instruction to include the effective personal contact required
for education and student interaction and maturity.

Chris Brazelton (10) (10) (10) (7.5) (7.5) (7.5) (10)

4.
Standardization offers advantages. As long as there
is enough variety to provide a quality learning experience for people
with different learning styles and strengths.

6. MOOCs lower
costs, easing budgets. It can, it
depends on how tuition is structured to see if it will lower the cost
of a quality education in the long run.

7. MOOCs preclude
personal contact.
I don't think we can move forward thinking that online courses can
replace the value that in-person courses offer. The exchange of ideas
between students and professors was invaluable during undergrad and
grad school. However, as a lawyer and a parent, I find great value in
being able to watch lectures at my convenience while juggling family
responsibilities. I have taken two high quality online courses
through Stanford from my home in MN that I would not otherwise have
access to and have significantly benefitted from them as a
professional.

Scott Halstead (0) (0) (0) (5) (2.5) (2.5) (2.5)

4.
Standardization offers advantages.
Quality may be excellent or terrible. If the quality was low, there
could be a very large problem. This tool needs to be utilized where
there is limited need for direct contact of others.

7. MOOCs preclude
personal contact.
It needs be a tool utilized when repetition is required.

Alan
Miller (2.5) (7.5) (5) (2.5) (2.5) (0) (10)

7. MOOCs preclude
personal contact.
There is no substitute for an in-person, classroom education, no
opportunity to properly evaluate the student, or assess responses to
dialogue, and many courses do not lend themselves to online learning.
Their value is superficial to what is offered in a one-on-one, or even
one-on-forty dialogue, which is becoming more obvious when comparing
results with online "university" teaching.

Don
Anderson (5) (7.5) (7.5) (5) (5) (2.5) (10)

1. MOOCs are a
major innovation.
How many of those taking on-line classes are already graduates of a
higher education institution?

David Alley (10) (10) (10) (10) (10) (10) (0)

Mark
Ritchie (na) (na) (na) (na) (na) (na) (na)

This was very
helpful - I have constructed and offered online classes (on trade
policy, for students in China) and taken a number of courses in this
manner but last year I got hooked on Khan Academy's math and stats
classes and have been tracking this very, very closely -- great
summary of a very important development underway in education.

Robert J. Brown (8) (6) (10) (6) (8) (8) (4)

1. MOOCs are a
major innovation.
Many of the free courses are merely offering individuals an
opportunity to learn on their own the way many people did in the
pre-electronic age by spending time in the public library.

4.
Standardization offers advantages. The financial
problems of the for-profit schools indicate that is not as simple as
this sounds.

6. MOOCs lower
costs, easing budgets.
This presumes many things including the ability or desire of elected
officials to do what is educationally most sound and not just what is
politically expedient.

7. MOOCs preclude
personal contact.
It all depends on how it is structured.

Carolyn Ring (10) (8) (8) (5) (7) (7) (10)

Wayne Jennings (10) (10) (10) (10) (10) (10) (3)

Clinefelter’s
comments remind me of Clayton Christensen’s disruptive innovation
paradigm in which the new innovation will not be as good as the
conventional, nor will there be a clamoring market prior to its new
product. As time passes, the disruptive innovation gains quality and
market thus threatening or overtaking the conventional practice.
Clinefelter has described an exciting emerging development. Higher
education needs this development in this era. The information and
learning world is undergoing a revolution. I thank Clinefelter and the
Civic Caucus for updating us.

Paul
and Ruth Hauge (7) (8) (6) (7) (6) (6) (7)

Fred
Senn (9) (9) (10) (8) (8) (6) (8)

Tom
Swain (7) (9) (7) (7) (7) (5) (10)

William Kuisle (5) (7) (9) (8) (8) (7) (4)

Tom
Spitznagle (10) (10) (10) (10) (10) (10) (8)

Lyall Schwarzkopf (7) (7) (9) (8) (8) (8) (6)

Ray
Ayotte (10) (10) (10) (10) (10) (10) (5)

Roy
Thompson (9) (8) (6) (6) (6) (8) (7)

Chuck Lutz (10) (9) (9) (8) (8) (9) (8)

Al
Quie (10) (10) (10) (10) (10) (10) (0)

The Civic Caucusis a non-partisan,
tax-exempt educational organization. The Core participants
include persons of varying political persuasions, reflecting years of leadership in politics and
business. Click here to see a short personal background of each.